The document provides an overview of RDA (Resource Description and Access), including its timeline, structure, major changes from AACR2, and examples. Some key points:
- RDA is based on FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) and its entity-relationship model.
- It has a three-part structure (elements, recording attributes, and recording relationships) and uses a "core" approach to required elements.
- Major changes from AACR2 include new terminology (e.g. content type, media type, carrier type), more flexible transcription, and removing limitations like the "rule of 3."
- Examples illustrate specific changes such as recording statements of responsibility and access
Cartographic Resources Cataloging with RDA WorkshopALATechSource
This document provides an overview of changes to cataloging maps using RDA compared to AACR2. It discusses new RDA concepts like core elements and transcription principles. Specific changes covered include removing the "rule of three" for statements of responsibility, replacing abbreviations like "s.l." and "s.n.", and using new fields like the 264 imprint field. The document also reviews recording map scale, projection, and coordinates in field 255 and provides examples of applying RDA principles to map cataloging records.
RDA focuses on the user and their tasks when creating metadata. It aims to record data that helps users find, identify, select, and obtain resources. This focus on the user is reflected throughout RDA's objectives, principles, and individual instructions. The data is designed to support user tasks like finding and identifying resources, rather than just following cataloging rules. RDA also simplifies transcription and removes abbreviations to make records easier for users to understand.
RDA is a new cataloging standard designed to replace AACR2 and provide guidelines for describing digital resources. It is based on FRBR and FRAD which are models that organize information by user tasks and relationships between entities like works, expressions, manifestations and items. RDA aims to be more intuitive for users by providing more detailed descriptions of resources and is being tested by various libraries and organizations before its full implementation. However, some questions remain regarding its costs and benefits compared to AACR2.
RDA is a new metadata standard that replaces AACR2. RDA is built on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models which analyze bibliographic data in terms of entities, attributes, and relationships. RDA focuses on the user and aims to provide data that helps users find, identify, select, and obtain resources. Key differences from AACR2 include taking data as it appears, recording relationships explicitly, and avoiding abbreviations to make data easier for users to understand.
Resource Description and Access (RDA), the cataloging standard developed to replace AACR2, will be released in June 2010, and a period of testing and evaluation of the new rules will begin. Join Emily Nimsakont, the NLC’s Cataloging Librarian, to learn the basics of RDA. Topics of discussion will include the goals and basic concepts of RDA, ways in which the new rules will differ from the current rules, and changes to MARC format related to RDA.
RDA is the new cataloging standard that replaces AACR2. It is based on FRBR and focuses on user tasks like finding, identifying, selecting, and obtaining resources. RDA uses FRBR entities and relationships to organize descriptive information and focuses on online resources. It differs from AACR2 in areas like elements, vocabularies, transcription, and levels of description. While RDA supports metadata sharing and digital environments, concerns include costs of implementation and difficulty adapting the new standard. The future of RDA remains unclear as it is still being developed.
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is a new standard for describing library resources, designed to replace AACR2. Library staff, including public services, systems personnel, and catalogers, may have heard mention of RDA but not know much about it or how it will change their daily work. You may have many questions. What is RDA? We'll give a very little bit of history and theoretical background. What is this going to mean for catalogers, ILS managers, and users in the near term? What are the future implications, or, why are we doing this? What are the juicy bits of controversy in cataloger-land? And finally, Do we HAVE to? We'll talk for a while, have some activities that get you thinking, and find out your thoughts on RDA.
Presented at "Captains & Crew Collaborating," the 8th annual paraprofessional conference at J.Y. Joyner Library, East Carolina University.
This document discusses timespan as a new entity in the Library Reference Model (LRM) which forms the basis for the 2020 revision of RDA. Some key points:
- In LRM, timespan is modeled separately from other entities like work and expression, with its own attributes and relationships.
- A timespan has a beginning, end, and duration. Common examples given are years, eras, or specific dates/times.
- Current cataloging already uses timespan concepts like date strings, but the new model provides a standardized framework.
- Elements like preferred name, authorized access point, category, beginning and end can be used to fully describe a timespan metadata description set.
Cartographic Resources Cataloging with RDA WorkshopALATechSource
This document provides an overview of changes to cataloging maps using RDA compared to AACR2. It discusses new RDA concepts like core elements and transcription principles. Specific changes covered include removing the "rule of three" for statements of responsibility, replacing abbreviations like "s.l." and "s.n.", and using new fields like the 264 imprint field. The document also reviews recording map scale, projection, and coordinates in field 255 and provides examples of applying RDA principles to map cataloging records.
RDA focuses on the user and their tasks when creating metadata. It aims to record data that helps users find, identify, select, and obtain resources. This focus on the user is reflected throughout RDA's objectives, principles, and individual instructions. The data is designed to support user tasks like finding and identifying resources, rather than just following cataloging rules. RDA also simplifies transcription and removes abbreviations to make records easier for users to understand.
RDA is a new cataloging standard designed to replace AACR2 and provide guidelines for describing digital resources. It is based on FRBR and FRAD which are models that organize information by user tasks and relationships between entities like works, expressions, manifestations and items. RDA aims to be more intuitive for users by providing more detailed descriptions of resources and is being tested by various libraries and organizations before its full implementation. However, some questions remain regarding its costs and benefits compared to AACR2.
RDA is a new metadata standard that replaces AACR2. RDA is built on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models which analyze bibliographic data in terms of entities, attributes, and relationships. RDA focuses on the user and aims to provide data that helps users find, identify, select, and obtain resources. Key differences from AACR2 include taking data as it appears, recording relationships explicitly, and avoiding abbreviations to make data easier for users to understand.
Resource Description and Access (RDA), the cataloging standard developed to replace AACR2, will be released in June 2010, and a period of testing and evaluation of the new rules will begin. Join Emily Nimsakont, the NLC’s Cataloging Librarian, to learn the basics of RDA. Topics of discussion will include the goals and basic concepts of RDA, ways in which the new rules will differ from the current rules, and changes to MARC format related to RDA.
RDA is the new cataloging standard that replaces AACR2. It is based on FRBR and focuses on user tasks like finding, identifying, selecting, and obtaining resources. RDA uses FRBR entities and relationships to organize descriptive information and focuses on online resources. It differs from AACR2 in areas like elements, vocabularies, transcription, and levels of description. While RDA supports metadata sharing and digital environments, concerns include costs of implementation and difficulty adapting the new standard. The future of RDA remains unclear as it is still being developed.
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is a new standard for describing library resources, designed to replace AACR2. Library staff, including public services, systems personnel, and catalogers, may have heard mention of RDA but not know much about it or how it will change their daily work. You may have many questions. What is RDA? We'll give a very little bit of history and theoretical background. What is this going to mean for catalogers, ILS managers, and users in the near term? What are the future implications, or, why are we doing this? What are the juicy bits of controversy in cataloger-land? And finally, Do we HAVE to? We'll talk for a while, have some activities that get you thinking, and find out your thoughts on RDA.
Presented at "Captains & Crew Collaborating," the 8th annual paraprofessional conference at J.Y. Joyner Library, East Carolina University.
This document discusses timespan as a new entity in the Library Reference Model (LRM) which forms the basis for the 2020 revision of RDA. Some key points:
- In LRM, timespan is modeled separately from other entities like work and expression, with its own attributes and relationships.
- A timespan has a beginning, end, and duration. Common examples given are years, eras, or specific dates/times.
- Current cataloging already uses timespan concepts like date strings, but the new model provides a standardized framework.
- Elements like preferred name, authorized access point, category, beginning and end can be used to fully describe a timespan metadata description set.
RDA is a new cataloging standard that aims to make resource description and access more intuitive for users. It is based on FRBR and FRAD models established by IFLA that define bibliographic entities and their attributes and relationships. RDA seeks to accommodate all types of resources, align with the semantic web, and simplify the cataloging process by focusing on recording attributes as they appear. It was implemented in 2013 and emphasizes direct transcription over abbreviations to create more user-friendly records. RDA aims to improve users' ability to find, identify, select, and acquire resources through catalog searches.
New Concepts: Representative Expressions and Manifestation Statements (Februa...ALAeLearningSolutions
The document discusses new concepts in RDA related to representative expressions and manifestation statements. It introduces the concept of representative expressions, which are attributes deemed essential for characterizing a work, taken from a representative expression of that work. This allows attributes of expressions like language and intended audience to be recorded at the work level. It outlines the new representative expression elements in RDA for different types of works and shows how representative expressions are represented in RDA metadata description sets using RDF triples.
This document provides an overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard that will be implemented by the Library of Congress in March 2013 and by the Mansfield Library in April 2013. It discusses why RDA is being adopted now, what RDA is and how it is designed for the digital world and user needs, and how RDA will affect cataloging practice at a core level through accepting existing records and making minor corrections. It also outlines how to identify RDA records and new elements being added, such as relationship terms, content type, media type and carrier type. New practices under RDA like use of "[corrected text]" and abbreviations are also mentioned. Resources for learning more about RDA implementation
Citing Internet Sources- How to cite an internet site?- ثبت مصادر الانترنتAhmed-Refat Refat
Citation of electronic sources require authors , reviewers and publishers of scholarly articles to know technical details about the many kinds of online sources possible, and they must know how to apply and interpret the highly variable formats given in electronic and internet citation guides. “Citing Medicine” the NLM style Guide for Authors, Publishers, and Editors – is considered as a standard source for many biomedical researches and publishers in citation process of their work. This presentation is based mainly on this valuable source and using only the last chapters –22 through 26- that dealing with citation styles of internet resources
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is a new cataloging standard that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and defines descriptive elements for resources while separating content from carrier information. RDA aims to be easier to use, applicable online, provide effective description of all media types, and be compatible with other standards like Dublin Core. It will have a logical structure based on entity-relationship modeling and be developed through an open process involving libraries worldwide. RDA is scheduled for full implementation in 2010 and will impact cataloging systems and metadata schemas like MARC 21.
RDA is based on FRBR, the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. FRBR was developed by IFLA in the 1990s to delineate the functions of bibliographic records. It defines core entities like works, expressions, manifestations and items. RDA incorporates FRBR concepts like treating the first author as the primary access point even if there are many authors. Some libraries have given conditional approval to adopt RDA but want changes to simplify language and address issues with using MARC as the encoding format.
This document provides an overview of RDA implementation:
- RDA was developed as a replacement for AACR2 and incorporates FRBR principles. It has been implemented by the Library of Congress since 2013.
- The transition to RDA involves changes to authority and bibliographic records, new MARC fields, and a shift in terminology and cataloging rules. Full implementation will take time as existing records are gradually enhanced.
- Libraries are making local decisions about how and when to adopt RDA based on available resources and priorities. Careful planning is needed to train staff, test systems changes, and communicate the transition to users.
Tools of our Trade (RDA, MARC21) 2010-03-15Ann Chapman
UKOLN is supported by various organizations. The document discusses tools for resource description like AACR2/RDA and MARC standards. It provides an overview of the development of RDA as the new cataloging standard to replace AACR2, including the goals, structure and timeline of RDA. The relationship between RDA and MARC 21 is also covered.
This document provides an introduction and overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard that replaces Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR). RDA is designed for the digital age and is based on Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD). RDA provides more flexibility and is compatible with current metadata standards and encoding formats like MARC. While RDA has some advantages, there are also ongoing considerations and discussions around its implementation.
New Concepts: Representative Expressions and Manifestation StatementsALAeLearningSolutions
This document discusses the concepts of representative expressions and manifestation statements in RDA. It explains that RDA 2020 introduces the concept of representative expression, which is an attribute of a work used to record essential characteristics from a canonical expression of that work. It provides examples of how representative expressions would be recorded in RDF triples and MARC records. The document also outlines the various representative expression elements that can be used to describe different types of works.
Business Dynamics I Acknowledging Sourceslindahauck
This document provides guidance on properly documenting sources and citations using APA style. It includes examples of citing periodical references, identifying figures and addressing copyright, and determining whether a source is scholarly or trade/professional. Tips are provided such as being consistent, proofreading citations, and ordering the reference list. Guides for APA style from the American Psychological Association are also referenced.
This document discusses aggregates and diachronic works. It defines an aggregate as a manifestation that embodies an aggregating work and one or more expressions. It describes different types of aggregates like aggregate collections and parallel aggregates. It also defines a diachronic work as a work that is planned to be embodied over time. Diachronic works include serials and other resources issued over time. The document outlines how aggregates and diachronic works are modeled in RDA and IFLA LRM, and provides guidance on cataloging these types of resources.
The document discusses the development of the concept of "nomen" in RDA and its related standards. It traces how nomen originated in earlier models like FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD as a way to designate entities and was consolidated in LRM. LRM defines nomen as an association between an entity and its designation, with attributes like category, language, and script. This lays the conceptual groundwork for nomen in RDA, where it is defined as a designation that refers to an RDA entity.
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is the new cataloging standard that replaces AACR2. It focuses on describing resources in the digital environment and utilizes relationships between entities. Catalog records will contain more information and be easier to understand. New search capabilities will be possible by exploring relationships between entities. Librarians outside cataloging should be aware of changes that may impact searching and displaying records, and should consult systems vendors regarding implementing RDA.
Special Topics: Recording Methods and Transcription Guidelines (July 2019)ALAeLearningSolutions
The document discusses recording methods and transcription guidelines for RDA cataloging. It defines the four RDA recording methods: unstructured description, structured description, identifier, and IRI. Examples of each are provided. The document also discusses manifestation statements and provides guidelines for basic and normalized transcription of manifestation statements.
Cataloging with RDA - Western New York Library Resources CouncilEmily Nimsakont
RDA is the new cataloging code that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models which are entity-relationship models that focus on user tasks. RDA differs significantly from AACR2 in its structure, terminology, transcription practices, and categorization of resources using media, carrier, and content types instead of GMDs. Testing of RDA by national libraries began in 2010 with full implementation planned after the testing period. Libraries need to prepare for RDA by learning the new terminology and monitoring developments during the testing process.
This document provides an overview and agenda for an event on RDA Revisited. The agenda includes sections on RDA basics, updates to RDA, practical applications of RDA, a copy cataloging exercise, and the future of RDA and cataloging. The RDA basics section outlines some key differences between RDA and AACR2, such as fewer abbreviations, removal of the rule of three, removal of Latin terms, and replacing the GMD. The RDA updates section notes the process for updating RDA and summarizes changes made since 2013. The practical applications section discusses hybrid records and authority control in RDA.
The document provides instructions on changes between AACR2 and RDA standards for cataloging. Some key changes include:
1. RDA uses less cataloging jargon and focuses on user needs rather than catalog card displays.
2. Elements like headings, uniform titles, and physical descriptions have been renamed or expanded to better reflect the resources being described.
3. Controlled vocabularies are more open and machine-readable in RDA to allow for more flexibility and automation.
4. Punctuation, abbreviations, and transcription rules are standardized differently between the two standards. Options that were choices in AACR2 are now part of the main instructions in RDA.
RDA is the new cataloging code that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models and designed to be more flexible and accommodate online resource description. RDA differs from AACR2 in its structure, terminology, categorization of resources, and transcription rules. Testing of RDA began in 2010 by national libraries and partners. Resources are available to help libraries prepare for the transition to RDA.
This is a short (1.5 hour) presentation for support staff about RDA and the do's and don'ts of editing bibliographic records in MARC format. Covers background material on RDA, identifying RDA records vs AACR2 records, changes to records and cataloging practices due to RDA (fields, vocabularies, terms, etc.), hybrid AACR2/RDA records, and the basic rules of editing (both general and for specific fields).
RDA Implementation at Edinburgh University Library, 2014/ Alasdair MacDonald...CIGScotland
Presented at the RDA for Implementers Conference, 27 May 2015 at the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh. Organised by the Cataloguing & Indexing Group in Scotland
This document provides an overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), including its history and development, testing process, implementation timeline, relationship to FRBR, and tools for accessing and learning RDA. It discusses how RDA is structured differently than AACR2 and will be coded in MARC, as well as references for further information.
RDA is a new cataloging standard that aims to make resource description and access more intuitive for users. It is based on FRBR and FRAD models established by IFLA that define bibliographic entities and their attributes and relationships. RDA seeks to accommodate all types of resources, align with the semantic web, and simplify the cataloging process by focusing on recording attributes as they appear. It was implemented in 2013 and emphasizes direct transcription over abbreviations to create more user-friendly records. RDA aims to improve users' ability to find, identify, select, and acquire resources through catalog searches.
New Concepts: Representative Expressions and Manifestation Statements (Februa...ALAeLearningSolutions
The document discusses new concepts in RDA related to representative expressions and manifestation statements. It introduces the concept of representative expressions, which are attributes deemed essential for characterizing a work, taken from a representative expression of that work. This allows attributes of expressions like language and intended audience to be recorded at the work level. It outlines the new representative expression elements in RDA for different types of works and shows how representative expressions are represented in RDA metadata description sets using RDF triples.
This document provides an overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard that will be implemented by the Library of Congress in March 2013 and by the Mansfield Library in April 2013. It discusses why RDA is being adopted now, what RDA is and how it is designed for the digital world and user needs, and how RDA will affect cataloging practice at a core level through accepting existing records and making minor corrections. It also outlines how to identify RDA records and new elements being added, such as relationship terms, content type, media type and carrier type. New practices under RDA like use of "[corrected text]" and abbreviations are also mentioned. Resources for learning more about RDA implementation
Citing Internet Sources- How to cite an internet site?- ثبت مصادر الانترنتAhmed-Refat Refat
Citation of electronic sources require authors , reviewers and publishers of scholarly articles to know technical details about the many kinds of online sources possible, and they must know how to apply and interpret the highly variable formats given in electronic and internet citation guides. “Citing Medicine” the NLM style Guide for Authors, Publishers, and Editors – is considered as a standard source for many biomedical researches and publishers in citation process of their work. This presentation is based mainly on this valuable source and using only the last chapters –22 through 26- that dealing with citation styles of internet resources
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is a new cataloging standard that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and defines descriptive elements for resources while separating content from carrier information. RDA aims to be easier to use, applicable online, provide effective description of all media types, and be compatible with other standards like Dublin Core. It will have a logical structure based on entity-relationship modeling and be developed through an open process involving libraries worldwide. RDA is scheduled for full implementation in 2010 and will impact cataloging systems and metadata schemas like MARC 21.
RDA is based on FRBR, the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. FRBR was developed by IFLA in the 1990s to delineate the functions of bibliographic records. It defines core entities like works, expressions, manifestations and items. RDA incorporates FRBR concepts like treating the first author as the primary access point even if there are many authors. Some libraries have given conditional approval to adopt RDA but want changes to simplify language and address issues with using MARC as the encoding format.
This document provides an overview of RDA implementation:
- RDA was developed as a replacement for AACR2 and incorporates FRBR principles. It has been implemented by the Library of Congress since 2013.
- The transition to RDA involves changes to authority and bibliographic records, new MARC fields, and a shift in terminology and cataloging rules. Full implementation will take time as existing records are gradually enhanced.
- Libraries are making local decisions about how and when to adopt RDA based on available resources and priorities. Careful planning is needed to train staff, test systems changes, and communicate the transition to users.
Tools of our Trade (RDA, MARC21) 2010-03-15Ann Chapman
UKOLN is supported by various organizations. The document discusses tools for resource description like AACR2/RDA and MARC standards. It provides an overview of the development of RDA as the new cataloging standard to replace AACR2, including the goals, structure and timeline of RDA. The relationship between RDA and MARC 21 is also covered.
This document provides an introduction and overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard that replaces Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR). RDA is designed for the digital age and is based on Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD). RDA provides more flexibility and is compatible with current metadata standards and encoding formats like MARC. While RDA has some advantages, there are also ongoing considerations and discussions around its implementation.
New Concepts: Representative Expressions and Manifestation StatementsALAeLearningSolutions
This document discusses the concepts of representative expressions and manifestation statements in RDA. It explains that RDA 2020 introduces the concept of representative expression, which is an attribute of a work used to record essential characteristics from a canonical expression of that work. It provides examples of how representative expressions would be recorded in RDF triples and MARC records. The document also outlines the various representative expression elements that can be used to describe different types of works.
Business Dynamics I Acknowledging Sourceslindahauck
This document provides guidance on properly documenting sources and citations using APA style. It includes examples of citing periodical references, identifying figures and addressing copyright, and determining whether a source is scholarly or trade/professional. Tips are provided such as being consistent, proofreading citations, and ordering the reference list. Guides for APA style from the American Psychological Association are also referenced.
This document discusses aggregates and diachronic works. It defines an aggregate as a manifestation that embodies an aggregating work and one or more expressions. It describes different types of aggregates like aggregate collections and parallel aggregates. It also defines a diachronic work as a work that is planned to be embodied over time. Diachronic works include serials and other resources issued over time. The document outlines how aggregates and diachronic works are modeled in RDA and IFLA LRM, and provides guidance on cataloging these types of resources.
The document discusses the development of the concept of "nomen" in RDA and its related standards. It traces how nomen originated in earlier models like FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD as a way to designate entities and was consolidated in LRM. LRM defines nomen as an association between an entity and its designation, with attributes like category, language, and script. This lays the conceptual groundwork for nomen in RDA, where it is defined as a designation that refers to an RDA entity.
RDA (Resource Description and Access) is the new cataloging standard that replaces AACR2. It focuses on describing resources in the digital environment and utilizes relationships between entities. Catalog records will contain more information and be easier to understand. New search capabilities will be possible by exploring relationships between entities. Librarians outside cataloging should be aware of changes that may impact searching and displaying records, and should consult systems vendors regarding implementing RDA.
Special Topics: Recording Methods and Transcription Guidelines (July 2019)ALAeLearningSolutions
The document discusses recording methods and transcription guidelines for RDA cataloging. It defines the four RDA recording methods: unstructured description, structured description, identifier, and IRI. Examples of each are provided. The document also discusses manifestation statements and provides guidelines for basic and normalized transcription of manifestation statements.
Cataloging with RDA - Western New York Library Resources CouncilEmily Nimsakont
RDA is the new cataloging code that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models which are entity-relationship models that focus on user tasks. RDA differs significantly from AACR2 in its structure, terminology, transcription practices, and categorization of resources using media, carrier, and content types instead of GMDs. Testing of RDA by national libraries began in 2010 with full implementation planned after the testing period. Libraries need to prepare for RDA by learning the new terminology and monitoring developments during the testing process.
This document provides an overview and agenda for an event on RDA Revisited. The agenda includes sections on RDA basics, updates to RDA, practical applications of RDA, a copy cataloging exercise, and the future of RDA and cataloging. The RDA basics section outlines some key differences between RDA and AACR2, such as fewer abbreviations, removal of the rule of three, removal of Latin terms, and replacing the GMD. The RDA updates section notes the process for updating RDA and summarizes changes made since 2013. The practical applications section discusses hybrid records and authority control in RDA.
The document provides instructions on changes between AACR2 and RDA standards for cataloging. Some key changes include:
1. RDA uses less cataloging jargon and focuses on user needs rather than catalog card displays.
2. Elements like headings, uniform titles, and physical descriptions have been renamed or expanded to better reflect the resources being described.
3. Controlled vocabularies are more open and machine-readable in RDA to allow for more flexibility and automation.
4. Punctuation, abbreviations, and transcription rules are standardized differently between the two standards. Options that were choices in AACR2 are now part of the main instructions in RDA.
RDA is the new cataloging code that will replace AACR2. It is based on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models and designed to be more flexible and accommodate online resource description. RDA differs from AACR2 in its structure, terminology, categorization of resources, and transcription rules. Testing of RDA began in 2010 by national libraries and partners. Resources are available to help libraries prepare for the transition to RDA.
This is a short (1.5 hour) presentation for support staff about RDA and the do's and don'ts of editing bibliographic records in MARC format. Covers background material on RDA, identifying RDA records vs AACR2 records, changes to records and cataloging practices due to RDA (fields, vocabularies, terms, etc.), hybrid AACR2/RDA records, and the basic rules of editing (both general and for specific fields).
RDA Implementation at Edinburgh University Library, 2014/ Alasdair MacDonald...CIGScotland
Presented at the RDA for Implementers Conference, 27 May 2015 at the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh. Organised by the Cataloguing & Indexing Group in Scotland
This document provides an overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), including its history and development, testing process, implementation timeline, relationship to FRBR, and tools for accessing and learning RDA. It discusses how RDA is structured differently than AACR2 and will be coded in MARC, as well as references for further information.
Cartographic resources cataloging with RDA: An introductionALATechSource
This document provides an overview of changes to cataloging cartographic resources using RDA. It reviews new RDA terminology and concepts, such as core elements. It discusses specific changes to fields like 245, 255, and 300. These include recording scale using representative fractions and expanding abbreviations. The document also introduces new RDA fields like 264 and explains how to handle statements of responsibility and supply information.
Presentation done* at the 13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) in which we approach a compressed format to represent RDF Data Streams. See the original article at: http://dataweb.infor.uva.es/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/iswc14.pdf
* Presented by Alejandro Llaves (http://www.slideshare.net/allaves)
UKOLN is supported by various organizations. The document discusses cataloging standards and formats including AACR2, RDA, MARC, FRBR and ISBD. It provides an overview of the history and development of these standards, their relationship to each other, and goals for RDA to address limitations of AACR2 and be compatible with other standards.
Good dictionaries are a key for text mining. We present an idea to build a platform where users can create their own dictionary and text-mining pipeline.
The tools of our trade: AACR2/RDA and MARCAnn Chapman
Guest lecture at London Metropolitan University on 13th March 2009. The lecture covered the history behind RDA, the international collaborative process by which it is being developed, an overview of the text and a look at the RDA approach to cataloguing; this was followed by an overview of the history and development process for the MARC format.
This document introduces RDA, the new metadata standard that replaces AACR2. It discusses the transition from AACR2 to RDA, highlighting some of the key differences in their theoretical frameworks and concepts. RDA is based on FRBR and FRAD conceptual models that view bibliographic data in terms of entities, attributes, and relationships. It also has new objectives and principles like a focus on user needs and representing resources as they present themselves.
METADEX is a bibliographic database covering metallurgy and materials literature worldwide since 1966. It contains over 5 million records on topics like steel composition and properties, alloy development, metal extraction and processing. Abstracts are available for most records added since 1979. The database is updated monthly with around 45,000 new entries per year.
This is intended to be a two day workshop on RDA. This workshop will explore RDA with a specific focus on theories, practicalities, authority work and hands on cataloging. The workshop will take the student through understanding the theories behind RDA and then cataloging by RDA standards.
The document provides an introduction to RDF (Resource Description Framework). It discusses that RDF is a framework for describing resources using statements with a subject, predicate, and object. RDF identifies resources with URIs and describes resources and their properties and property values. An example RDF document is provided that describes CDs with properties like artist, country, and price.
The document provides an introduction and schedule for a training session on RDA, the new cataloging code. It discusses the background and history of RDA, including how it is based on FRBR and FRAD models and is designed to be used online. The schedule outlines topics to be covered such as differences from AACR2, examples, and a demonstration of the RDA Toolkit.
This document provides an overview of Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard that will replace AACR2. It discusses what RDA is, why it was developed, how it relates to FRBR, and some of the key differences between RDA and AACR2, such as changes to terminology, transcription, and MARC fields. It also explores potential future directions for RDA, such as linked data and semantic web applications. The document concludes by offering suggestions for how libraries can prepare to implement RDA.
1. RDA: What We Need to Know!
Milton S. Eisenhower Library
Technical Services Department
November 12, 2010
2. Overview
• Timeline
• FRBR: Vocabulary and
Modelling
• Structure of RDA
• Major Changes from AACR2
• Examples
3. Timeline
• October 1 – December 31, 2010:
– Formal RDA test
• January 2 – March 31, 2011:
– Test assessment leading to a report of
recommendations
• April – June 2011:
– Decision making by LC, hopefully to be announced at
ALA Annual.
4. FRBR and RDA
• International model: everyone speaking
the same language
• Focus on the user: cataloger judgment
to customize records for your users
• Entities and Relationships
5. • Work
• Expression
• Manifestation
• Item
FRBR Model
• IS REALIZED THROUGH
•IS EMBODIED IN
•IS EXEMPLIFIED BY
6. • FRBR
• International Cataloging Principles
– Replaces Paris Principles (1961)
– Convenience for the User:
• “…if considered important for identification or
access…”
– Representation:
• Take what you see
Basis of RDA
7. • 10 sections
• Overall structure:
– AACR2: type of material
– RDA: elements
• Sections 1-4: Recording attributes of
elements
• Sections 5-10: Recording relationships
between elements
Structure of RDA
8. • Core
– Always required if applicable
– A floor, not a ceiling
• Core if…
– Required in certain situations
• Beyond the Core
– Customize to address the needs of users
Structure of RDA
9. • 040 $e rda
• Leader/18 (Desc): i for ISBD
punctuation
How to Tell a Record is RDA
10. AACR2
• Heading
• Main Entry
• Uniform Title
• Chief Source of
Information
Changes from AACR2
RDA
• Authorized Access
Point
• Preferred Title +
Authorized Access
Point
• Preferred Title
• Preferred Source of
Information
11. • The GMD (General Material Designation, i.e.,
245 $h) has been eliminated. In its place:
– 336: Content Type
– 337: Media Type
– 338: Carrier Type
Changes from AACR2
12. • Content Type (336)
– Fundamental form of communication in which
the content is expressed and the human sense
through which it is intended to be perceived.
– Wiki Link to 336 Terms
Changes from AACR2
13. • Media Type (337)
–General type of intermediation device
required to view, play, run, etc., the
content of a resource.
–Wiki Link to 337 Terms
Changes from AACR2
14. • Carrier Type (338)
– Format of the storage medium and housing of
a carrier in combination with the type of
intermediation device required to view, play,
run, etc., the content of a resource.
– Wiki Link to 338 Terms
Changes from AACR2
15. Adapted from: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
16. • Abbreviations
– Do not use abbreviations unless they appear as
such on the piece
• Inaccuracies
– Do not correct inaccuracies: transcribe what you
see, and if necessary, add:
• 246 1b $i Title should read: $a…
– Exception: Serials
Changes from AACR2
17. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
18. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
19. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
20. • Latin Terms
– No longer use Latin terms/abbreviations,
such as i.e., s.n., s.l., and so on.
Changes from AACR2
21. • Transcription
– Transcribe punctuation as it appears on the item:
• “…” or “[ ]”
– Edition statements:
• Transcribe as they appear without abbreviation unless
the abbreviation is present. If punctuation is used,
include that punctuation in addition to the punctuation
required by the field.
• Example: 250 $a Second ed..
Changes from AACR2
22. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
23. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
24. • Statement of Responsibility
– Can take from anywhere on the resource without
using square brackets.
– Transcribe in the form found (include things like
“the Reverend…,” “the late…,” etc.)
– If a noun phrase (e.g., a novel by…) appears as
part of the statement of responsibility, transcribe it
in $c.
Changes from AACR2
25. • No more “rule of 3”
– Can record as many authors, editors, etc.
as are present.
– CORE: only the first listed is required.
– Optional omission: [and x others].
Changes from AACR2
26. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
27. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
28. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
29. • Place of publication, distribution, etc.
– Do not correct in the 260 if known to be
false. Record as you find it, and make the
correction in a note.
– If an abbreviation is used on the piece,
transcribe it as it appears, and make a
note if needed to clarify.
Changes from AACR2
30. • Place of publication, distribution, etc.
– No longer take the first and then the first in
the U.S.
– Transcribe all that appear.
– Core: if more than one, only the first is
required.
– If none appears, provide probable if
possible.
Changes from AACR2
31. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
32. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
33. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
34. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
35. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
36. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
37. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
38. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
39. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
40. • Date of publication
– A Core element
• If one cannot be determined, use a probable
date
• If no probable is possible: “date of publication
not identified”
– Copyright date is a separate element
• Core if neither date of publication nor date of
distribution is identified
Changes from AACR2
41. • “Core if” chain reaction:
– Publication
– Distribution
• If publication information not available and no guess can
be made
– Copyright
• If distribution information is not available
– Manufacture
• If none of the above information is available and no
guess can be made
Changes from AACR2
42. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
43. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
44. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
45. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
46. • Extent
– Use spelled out terms (pages, leaves,
volumes, etc.)
– Use one of the terms in the 336 list.
Changes from AACR2
48. • Dimensions
– Same rules as AACR2, basically
– Exception to “no abbreviations” rule in
RDA:
• In RDA, “cm” is not considered an abbreviation
but a metric symbol.
Changes from AACR2
49. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
50. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
51. • Series Numbering
– Take from anywhere on the resource
– Again, transcribe as it appears
Changes from AACR2
52. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
53. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
54. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
55. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
56. • Access Points
– No rule of 3: in AACR2, when the rule of 3
was invoked, the manifestation would be
entered under title, with author added
entry
– In RDA, all listed names can be entered,
and the first listed would be the 100.
Changes from AACR2
57. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
64. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
65. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
66. Source: Schiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”
http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
67. Changes from AACR2
• Bible headings
-In AACR2, the heading for books of
the Bible appeared in the form:
-$a Bible. $p O.T. $p Genesis.
-In RDA, remove the O.T. or N.T.:
-$a Bible. $p Genesis.
-If heading is for the testament as a
whole, spell out:
-$a Bible. $p Old Testament.
77. Record with multiple Bible headings:
http://libcat.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=870600
Record with change of abbreviations S.l. and s.n.:
http://libcat.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=5207
Record with transcription of all authors on the title page with added entries:
http://libcat.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=1001996
Record with a spelled out edition statement:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=4486842
Videorecording with 337 field:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=4482502
PAC Examples
78. Music CD symphony:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=7991665
Music CD opera:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=6491157
Website:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=5889384
Map:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=7987802
Online map:
http://ipac.lib.uchicago.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&index=BIB&term=8003041
PAC Examples
The GMD has been replaced in RDA by Media type (3.2), Carrier type (3.3), and Content type (6.9).
3.2. Media type (MARC tag 337) is a categorization reflecting the general type of intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a resource. Values in RDA: audio; computer; microform; microscopic; projected; stereographic; unmediated; video; other; unspecified. Each value also has a MARC code established for it that can be used in 337 $b.
3.3. Carrier type (MARC tag 338) is a categorization reflecting the format of the storage medium and housing of a carrier in combination with the type of intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a resource. Each value also has a MARC code established for it that can be used in 338 $b.
Audio carriers: audio cartridge; audio cylinder; audio disc; audio roll; audiocassette; audiotape reel; sound-track reel
Computer carriers: computer card; computer chip cartridge; computer disc; computer disc cartridge; computer tape cartridge; computer tape cassette; computer tape reel; online resource
Microform carriers: aperture card; microfiche; microfiche cassette; microfilm cartridge; microfilm cassette; microfilm reel; microfilm roll; microfilm slip; microopaque
Microscopic carriers: microscope slide
Projected image carriers: film cartridge; film cassette; film reel; film roll; filmslip; filmstrip; filmstrip cartridge; overhead transparency; slide
Stereographic carriers: stereograph card; stereograph disc
Unmediated carriers: card; flipchart; object; roll; sheet; volume
Video carriers: video cartridge; videocassette; videodisc; videotape reel
Other values established: other; unspecified
6.9. Content type (MARC tag 336) is a categorization reflecting the fundamental form of communication in which the content is expressed and the human sense through which it is intended to be perceived. For content expressed in the form of an image or images, content type also reflects the number of spatial dimensions in which the content is intended to be perceived and the perceived presence or absence of movement. Values: cartographic dataset; cartographic image; cartographic moving image; cartographic tactile image; cartographic tactile three-dimensional form; cartographic three-dimensional form; computer dataset; computer program; notated movement; notated music; performed music; sounds; spoken word; still image; tactile image; tactile notated music; tactile text; tactile three-dimensional form; text; three-dimensional form; three-dimensional moving image; two-dimensional moving image; other; unspecified. Each value also has a MARC code established for it that can be used in 336 $b.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
In AACR2 inaccuracies are transcribed followed either by [sic] or by i.e. and the correction within square brackets. Supply a missing letter or letters in square brackets.
In RDA, inaccuracies are transcribed as they appear on the source of information. If necessary, a note may be made correcting the inaccuracy, and the title as corrected may be recorded as a variant title if it is considered important for access. When transcribing the title proper of a serial or integrating resource, correct obvious typographic errors, and make a note giving the title as it appears on the source of information. In case of doubt about whether the spelling of a word is incorrect, transcribe the spelling as found. Record the title as it appears on the source of information as a variant title if it is considered to be important for access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
In AACR2 inaccuracies are transcribed followed either by [sic] or by i.e. and the correction within square brackets. Supply a missing letter or letters in square brackets. In RDA, inaccuracies are transcribed as they appear on the source of information. If necessary, a note may be made correcting the inaccuracy, and the title as corrected may be recorded as a variant title if it is considered important for access. When transcribing the title proper of a serial or integrating resource, correct obvious typographic errors, and make a note giving the title as it appears on the source of information. In case of doubt about whether the spelling of a word is incorrect, transcribe the spelling as found. Record the title as it appears on the source of information as a variant title if it is considered to be important for access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
In AACR2 inaccuracies are transcribed followed either by [sic] or by i.e. and the correction within square brackets. Supply a missing letter or letters in square brackets. In RDA, inaccuracies are transcribed as they appear on the source of information. If necessary, a note may be made correcting the inaccuracy, and the title as corrected may be recorded as a variant title if it is considered important for access. When transcribing the title proper of a serial or integrating resource, correct obvious typographic errors, and make a note giving the title as it appears on the source of information. In case of doubt about whether the spelling of a word is incorrect, transcribe the spelling as found. Record the title as it appears on the source of information as a variant title if it is considered to be important for access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.1B1. If the title proper as given in the chief source of information includes the punctuation marks … or [ ], replace them by – and ( ), respectively.
RDA 1.7.3. Transcribe punctuation as it appears on the source, omitting punctuation on the source that separates data to be recorded as one element from data to be recorded as a different element, or as a second or subsequent instance of an element.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
In RDA, edition statement is a transcribed element and no abbreviations are used unless they appear on the source used for the edition statement.
AACR2 1.2.B1. Transcribe the edition statement as found on the item. Use abbreviations as instructed in appendix B and numerals as instructed in appendix C.
Ny udg.
(Source of information reads: Ny udgave)
2nd ed.
(Source of information reads: Second edition)
AACR2 B.5A1. Abbreviate words, or substitute one form of abbreviation with the prescribed abbreviation, in the edition statement, according to B.9-B.12, B.14-B.15.
AACR2 C.2B1. Substitute arabic numerals for roman in the following areas and elements of the bibliographic description: a) in an edition statement
AACR2 C.3B1. Substitute arabic numerals for numbers expressed as words in the following areas and elements of the bibliographic description: a) in an edition statement
RDA 2.5.1.4. Transcribe an edition statement as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
RDA B.4. For transcribed elements, use only those abbreviations found in the sources of information for the element.
RDA 1.8.1. When recording numbers expressed as numerals or as words in a transcribed element, transcribe them in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription (see 1.7 ), as applicable.
Since edition statement is not listed in 1.8.1, none of the special rules on recording numbers in 1.8.2-1.8.5 apply, so no substitutions will be made in edition statements.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.1F7. Include titles and abbreviations of titles of nobility, address, honour, and distinction, initials of societies, qualifications, date(s) of founding, mottoes, etc., in statements of responsibility if:
a) such data are necessary grammatically
… / … ; prólogo del Excmo. Sr. D. Manuel Fraga Iribarne
b) the omission would leave only a person’s given name or surname
… / by Miss Jane
… / by Miss Read
… / by Dr. Johnson
… / by the Baroness Orczy
c) the title is necessary to identify a person
… / by Mrs. Charles H. Gibson
d) the title is a title of nobility, or is a British term of honour (Sir, Dame, Lord, or Lady).
… / Anne Finch, Countess of Winchilsea
… / by Sir Richard Acland
Otherwise, omit all such data from statements of responsibility. Do not use the mark of omission.
RDA 2.4.1.4. Transcribe a statement of responsibility in the form in which it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
Optional Omission
Abridge a statement of responsibility only if it can be abridged without loss of essential information. Do not use a mark of omission (…) to indicate such an omission. Always record the first name appearing in the statement. When omitting names from a statement of responsibility naming more than one person, etc., apply the instructions given under 2.4.1.5.
Note: LC proposed practice for the RDA Test is to generally not omit info or names, etc.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.1F12. Treat a noun phrase occurring in conjunction with a statement of responsibility as other title information if it is indicative of the nature of the work.
Characters from Dickens [GMD] : dramatised adaptations / by Barry Campbell
If the noun or noun phrase is indicative of the role of the person(s) or body (bodies) named in the statement of responsibility rather than of the nature of the work, treat it as part of the statement of responsibility.
Roman Britain [GMD] / research and text by Colin Barham
In case of doubt, treat the noun or noun phrase as part of the statement of responsibility.
2.4.1.8 If a noun or noun phrase occurs with a statement of responsibility, treat the noun or noun phrase as part of the statement of responsibility.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
2.4.1.5. Record a statement of responsibility naming more than one person, etc., as a single statement regardless of whether the persons, families, or corporate bodies named in it perform the same function or different functions.
Optional Omission
If a single statement of responsibility names more than three persons, families, or corporate bodies performing the same function, or with the same degree of responsibility, omit all but the first of each group of such persons, families, or bodies. Indicate the omission by summarizing what has been omitted in the language and script preferred by the agency preparing the description. Indicate that the summary was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4.
2.2.4 If information taken from a source outside the resource itself is supplied in any of the elements listed below, indicate that fact either by means of a note or by some other means (e.g., through coding or the use of square brackets).
Note: the LC proposed practice for the RDA Test is generally not to apply the optional omission.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B4 and 1.4C3 says to use abbreviations found in appendix B. In RDA there are no abbreviations in this element unless they are found in the sources of information for the element.
RDA 2.8.1.4. Transcribe places of publication and publishers' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
Optional Omission
Omit levels in a corporate hierarchy that are not required to identify the publisher. Do not use a mark of omission (…) to indicate such an omission.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B4 and 1.4C3 says to use abbreviations found in appendix B. In RDA there are no abbreviations in this element unless they are found in the sources of information for the element.
RDA 2.8.1.4. Transcribe places of publication and publishers' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
Optional Omission
Omit levels in a corporate hierarchy that are not required to identify the publisher. Do not use a mark of omission (…) to indicate such an omission.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B4 and 1.4C3 says to use abbreviations found in appendix B. In RDA there are no abbreviations in this element unless they are found in the sources of information for the element. 1.4D2 says to give the name of a publisher, distributor, etc., in the shortest form in which it can be understood and identified internationally. There is no equivalent rule in RDA. Publisher, distributor, and manufacturer names are transcribed as found.
RDA 2.8.1.4. Transcribe places of publication and publishers' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
RDA 2.8.2.3. Include both the local place name (city, town, etc.) and the name of the larger jurisdiction or jurisdictions (state, province, etc., and/or country) if present on the source of information.
RDA 2.9.1.4. Transcribe places of distribution and distributors' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
RDA 2.9.2.3. Include both the local place name (city, town, etc.) and the name of the larger jurisdiction or jurisdictions (state, province, etc., and/or country) if present on the source of information.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B4 and 1.4C3 says to use abbreviations found in appendix B. In RDA there are no abbreviations in this element unless they are found in the sources of information for the element. 1.4D2 says to give the name of a publisher, distributor, etc., in the shortest form in which it can be understood and identified internationally. There is no equivalent rule in RDA. Publisher, distributor, and manufacturer names are transcribed as found.
RDA 2.8.1.4. Transcribe places of publication and publishers' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
RDA 2.8.2.3. Include both the local place name (city, town, etc.) and the name of the larger jurisdiction or jurisdictions (state, province, etc., and/or country) if present on the source of information.
RDA 2.9.1.4. Transcribe places of distribution and distributors' names in the form in which they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.
RDA 2.9.2.3. Include both the local place name (city, town, etc.) and the name of the larger jurisdiction or jurisdictions (state, province, etc., and/or country) if present on the source of information.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B6, 1.4C2, 1.4C3, 1.4C4 all specify the addition of information in square brackets. In RDA the element is transcribed as it appears, and notes are used to record additional/different information if considered important (RDA 2.20.6-2.20.9).
2.20.7.3 Make notes on details relating to place of publication, publisher, or date of publication not recorded in the publication statement element, if they are considered to be important for identification or access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B6, 1.4C2, 1.4C3, 1.4C4 all specify the addition of information in square brackets. In RDA the element is transcribed as it appears, and notes are used to record additional/different information if considered important(RDA 2.20.6-2.20.9).
2.20.7.3 Make notes on details relating to place of publication, publisher, or date of publication not recorded in the publication statement element, if they are considered to be important for identification or access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.4B6, 1.4C2, 1.4C3, 1.4C4 all specify the addition of information in square brackets. In RDA the element is transcribed as it appears, and notes are used to record additional/different information if considered important (RDA 2.20.6-2.20.9).
2.20.7.3 Make notes on details relating to place of publication, publisher, or date of publication not recorded in the publication statement element, if they are considered to be important for identification or access.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.4C5 specifies what to do when there is more than one place listed, and results vary based on the home country of the cataloging agency:
1.4C5. If two or more places in which a publisher, distributor, etc., has offices are named in the item, give the first named place. Give any subsequently named place that is given prominence by the layout or typography of the source of information. If the first named place and any place given prominence are not in the home country of the cataloguing agency, give also the first of any subsequently named places that is in the home country. Omit all other places.
In RDA, the place names are recorded in the order indicated by the sequence, layout, or typography of the names on the source of information (2.7.2.4, 2.8.2.4, 2.9.2.4, 2.10.2.4). Only the first place on the source is required.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.4C5 specifies what to do when there is more than one place listed, and results vary based on the home country of the cataloging agency:
1.4C5. If two or more places in which a publisher, distributor, etc., has offices are named in the item, give the first named place. Give any subsequently named place that is given prominence by the layout or typography of the source of information. If the first named place and any place given prominence are not in the home country of the cataloguing agency, give also the first of any subsequently named places that is in the home country. Omit all other places.
In RDA, the place names are recorded in the order indicated by the sequence, layout, or typography of the names on the source of information (2.7.2.4, 2.8.2.4, 2.9.2.4, 2.10.2.4). Only the first place on the source is required.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.4F7. If no date of publication, distribution, etc., copyright date, or date of manufacture appears in an item, supply an approximate date of publication.
, [1971 or 1972] one year or the other
, [1969?] probable date
, [between 1906 and 1912] use only for dates fewer than 20 years apart
, [ca. 1960] approximate date
, [197-] decade certain
, [197-?] probable decade
, [18--] century certain
, [18–?] probable century
There is no equivalent to a circa date (ca.) in RDA.
2.16G. If the item is undated and the date of publication is unknown, give an approximate date.
[1492?]
[not after Aug. 21, 1492]
[between 1711 and 1719]
2.8.6.6. Date of Publication Not Identified in the Resource
For a resource in a published form, if the date of publication is not identified in the resource, supply the date or approximate date of publication. Apply the instructions on supplied dates given under 1.9.2.
If an approximate date of publication for a resource that is in a published form cannot reasonably be determined, record date of publication not identified.
Note: AACR2 1.4F7 limits “between” dates to dates fewer than 20 years apart. There is no such limitation in RDA.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
What the RDA MARC record will look like will depend on whether a library goes beyond the core element/core if requirements. You would only include the copyright date as in the examples in this slide, if you were going beyond the “core if” requirement for copyright date.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
1.4F6. If the dates of publication, distribution, etc., are unknown, give the copyright date or, in its absence, the date of manufacture (indicated as such) in its place.
, c1967
, 1967 printing
, p1983
, 1979 pressing
2.10.6. Date of Manufacture. Date of manufacture is a core element for a resource in a published form if neither the date of publication, the date of distribution, nor the copyright date is identified.
If a date of publication is supplied, as in the first example in the slide, then the date of manufacture is not required. In the second example in the slide, the date of manufacture is core and required because there is not date of publication, distribution, or copyright. The place of manufacture and name of manufacturer are not required in the second example because a place of publication and name of publisher are present. In both RDA examples, both places of publication have been recorded, but only the first is required as a core element.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
Note: The full stop used after symbol “cm” is the ISBD full stop preceding the next area; “cm” is a symbol, not an abbreviation.
The spelling of colour/color is not prescribed by RDA.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
First example: There is no equivalent in RDA to AACR2 2.5C5. If the publication consists wholly or predominantly of illustrations, give all ill. or chiefly ill., as appropriate. Optionally, if those illustrations are all of one type, give all [name of type] or chiefly [name of type].
: all ill.
: chiefly maps
RDA 7.15.1.4 says: Record details of the illustrative content if they are considered to be important for identification or selection.
Second example: carrier type in RDA (3.3) is different from AACR2 SMD; abbreviations are still used for durations (B.5.3); in RDA the terms used for the configuration of playback channels (3.16.8) are not abbreviations: mono; stereo; quadraphonic; surround. In AACR2 6.5C7 Number of sound channels, there were only three terms: mono.; stereo.; quad. Note: for the RDA Test in the U.S., disc dimensions will still be given in inches. If an agency decided to apply 3.4.1.5 c) they could say 1 CD or 1 compact disc instead of 1 audio disc.
Third example: colour content (7.17) comes before sound content (7.18) and no abbreviations are used. Note: for the RDA Test in the U.S., disc dimensions will still be given in inches. If an agency decided to apply 3.4.1.5 c) they could say 1 DVD instead of 1 videodisc.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.6G. Give the numbering of the item within the series in the terms given in the item. Use abbreviations as instructed in appendix B and numerals as instructed in appendix C.
RDA 2.12.9.3. Record the numbering of the resource within the series as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7 and the general guidelines on numbers expressed as numerals or as words given under 1.8.
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the series numbering unless the instructions in appendix A appropriate to the language involved require capitalization (e.g., noun capitalization in German). Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices used as part of a numbering system according to the usage in the resource.
RDA A.7. Numbering within Series and Subseries
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the numbering within a series (see 2.12.9) or subseries (see 2.12.17) unless the guidelines given under A.10–A.55 applicable to the language involved require capitalization. Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices according to the usage on the resource.
1.8.2. Record numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, unless the substitution would make the numbering less clear.
Alternatives
Record numerals in the form in which they appear on the source of information. RDA Test: Yes, apply the alternative – record numerals in form in which they appear.
Record the numerals in the form in which they appear on the source. Add the equivalent numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, indicating that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4. RDA Test: No, not both as appear and form preferred by agency.
1.8.3. Substitute numerals for numbers expressed as words.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.6G. Give the numbering of the item within the series in the terms given in the item. Use abbreviations as instructed in appendix B and numerals as instructed in appendix C.
RDA 2.12.9.3. Record the numbering of the resource within the series as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7 and the general guidelines on numbers expressed as numerals or as words given under 1.8.
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the series numbering unless the instructions in appendix A appropriate to the language involved require capitalization (e.g., noun capitalization in German). Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices used as part of a numbering system according to the usage in the resource.
RDA A.7. Numbering within Series and Subseries
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the numbering within a series (see 2.12.9) or subseries (see 2.12.17) unless the guidelines given under A.10–A.55 applicable to the language involved require capitalization. Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices according to the usage on the resource.
1.8.2. Record numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, unless the substitution would make the numbering less clear.
Alternatives
Record numerals in the form in which they appear on the source of information. RDA Test: Yes, apply the alternative – record numerals in form in which they appear.
Record the numerals in the form in which they appear on the source. Add the equivalent numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, indicating that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4. RDA Test: No, not both as appear and form preferred by agency.
1.8.3. Substitute numerals for numbers expressed as words.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.6G. Give the numbering of the item within the series in the terms given in the item. Use abbreviations as instructed in appendix B and numerals as instructed in appendix C.
RDA 2.12.9.3. Record the numbering of the resource within the series as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7 and the general guidelines on numbers expressed as numerals or as words given under 1.8.
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the series numbering unless the instructions in appendix A appropriate to the language involved require capitalization (e.g., noun capitalization in German). Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices used as part of a numbering system according to the usage in the resource.
RDA A.7. Numbering within Series and Subseries
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the numbering within a series (see 2.12.9) or subseries (see 2.12.17) unless the guidelines given under A.10–A.55 applicable to the language involved require capitalization. Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices according to the usage on the resource.
1.8.2. Record numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, unless the substitution would make the numbering less clear.
Alternatives
Record numerals in the form in which they appear on the source of information. RDA Test: Yes, apply the alternative – record numerals in form in which they appear.
Record the numerals in the form in which they appear on the source. Add the equivalent numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, indicating that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4. RDA Test: No, not both as appear and form preferred by agency.
1.8.3. Substitute numerals for numbers expressed as words.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
AACR2 1.6G. Give the numbering of the item within the series in the terms given in the item. Use abbreviations as instructed in appendix B and numerals as instructed in appendix C.
RDA 2.12.9.3. Record the numbering of the resource within the series as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7 and the general guidelines on numbers expressed as numerals or as words given under 1.8.
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the series numbering unless the instructions in appendix A appropriate to the language involved require capitalization (e.g., noun capitalization in German). Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices used as part of a numbering system according to the usage in the resource.
2.12.9.6. If a new sequence of numbering is accompanied by wording to differentiate the sequence, such as new series, include this wording.
If a new sequence of numbering with the same system as before is not accompanied by wording such as new series, supply new series or another appropriate term. Indicate that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4.
RDA A.7. Numbering within Series and Subseries
Do not capitalize a term that is part of the numbering within a series (see 2.12.9) or subseries (see 2.12.17) unless the guidelines given under A.10–A.55 applicable to the language involved require capitalization. Capitalize other words and alphabetic devices according to the usage on the resource.
1.8.2. Record numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, unless the substitution would make the numbering less clear.
Alternatives
Record numerals in the form in which they appear on the source of information. RDA Test: Yes, apply the alternative – record numerals in form in which they appear.
Record the numerals in the form in which they appear on the source. Add the equivalent numerals in the form preferred by the agency creating the data, indicating that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself as instructed under 2.2.4. RDA Test: No, not both as appear and form preferred by agency.
1.8.3. Substitute numerals for numbers expressed as words.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
21.6C2. If responsibility is shared among more than three persons or corporate bodies and principal responsibility is not attributed to any one, two, or three, enter under title. Make an added entry under the heading for the first person or corporate body named prominently in the item being catalogued. If editors are named prominently, make an added entry under the heading for each if there are not more than three. If there are more than three named prominently, make an added entry under the heading for the principal editor and/or for the one named first.
21.30B1. If the main entry is under the heading for a corporate body or under a title, make added entries under the headings for collaborating persons if there are not more than three, or under the heading for the first named of four or more.
6.27.1.3 If principal responsibility for the work is not indicated, construct the authorized access point representing the work using the authorized access point representing the first-named person, family, or corporate body followed by the preferred title for the work.
19.2.1.3 Record a creator applying the general guidelines on recording relationships to persons, families, and corporate bodies associated with a resource given under 18.4.
Note: the policy on how many names to include in a statement of responsibility doesn’t automatically correspond to the same policy for how many authorized access points to give. You could give [and four others] in the 245 and still give four 700 fields, or you could give all in the 245 but none in 700 fields or only some in 700 fields.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
21.7C1. If a work falling into one of the categories given in 21.7A1 lacks a collective title, enter it under the heading appropriate to the first work named in the chief source of information of the item being catalogued. If the item lacks a collective chief source of information, enter it under the heading appropriate to the first work in the item. Make added entries for editors/compilers and for the other works as instructed in 21.7B1, insofar as it applies to works without a collective title.
6.27.1.4 Compilations of Works by Different Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies
If the compilation lacks a collective title, construct separate access points for each of the works in the compilation.
Alternative
Instead of (or in addition to) constructing access points for each of the works in the compilation, construct an authorized access point representing the compilation using a devised title formulated according to the instructions given under 2.3.2.11.
For the U.S. RDA Test the decision on the alternative is: Yes, devise a title (see next slide).
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
21.7C1. If a work falling into one of the categories given in 21.7A1 lacks a collective title, enter it under the heading appropriate to the first work named in the chief source of information of the item being catalogued. If the item lacks a collective chief source of information, enter it under the heading appropriate to the first work in the item. Make added entries for editors/compilers and for the other works as instructed in 21.7B1, insofar as it applies to works without a collective title.
6.27.1.4 Compilations of Works by Different Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies
If the compilation lacks a collective title, construct separate access points for each of the works in the compilation.
Alternative
Instead of (or in addition to) constructing access points for each of the works in the compilation, construct an authorized access point representing the compilation using a devised title formulated according to the instructions given under 2.3.2.11.
For the U.S. RDA Test the decision on the alternative is: Yes, devise a title.
Note: Cataloger's judgment which convention to use (and whether to use more than one) to express relationships: could be only the 505 (description) or could be only 700s (authorized access points) or could be both. Could also be only or also identifiers (won't be used alone during U.S. test of RDA).
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
25.6B3. If the item consists of three or more unnumbered or nonconsecutively numbered parts of, or of extracts from, a work, use the uniform title for the whole work followed by Selections.
6.27.2.3 Two or More Parts
When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered parts of a work, construct authorized access points for each of the parts applying the instructions given under 6.27.2.2.
Alternative
When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered parts of a work, treat the parts as an expression of the whole work. Construct the authorized access point representing the expression by adding Selections to the authorized access point representing the work as a whole (see 6.27.1 and 6.12.1.4).
RDA Test decision: Yes, apply alternative.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
25.6B3. If the item consists of three or more unnumbered or nonconsecutively numbered parts of, or of extracts from, a work, use the uniform title for the whole work followed by Selections.
6.27.2.3 Two or More Parts
When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered parts of a work, construct authorized access points for each of the parts applying the instructions given under 6.27.2.2.
Alternative
When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered parts of a work, treat the parts as an expression of the whole work. Construct the authorized access point representing the expression by adding Selections to the authorized access point representing the work as a whole (see 6.27.1 and 6.12.1.4).
RDA Test decision: Yes, apply alternative.
The 700 added entries in the RDA example could be made based on the instructions for referencing related works in chapter 25.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
There are quite a few other changes that I do not have time to cover. But the next slides illustrate some significant changes in the formulation of access points.
Because Hank Williams, Jr.’s birth date is available, in AACR2 the term “Jr.” is not included in his heading. In RDA, terms indicating relationship such as “Jr.” are treated as part of the name.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
RDA Appendix B does not contain any abbreviations for months. Other terms associated with dates that are abbreviated in AACR (b., d., fl., cent.) are spelled out in RDA. “ca.” is replaced by “approximately”.
9.3.2.3 If the person was born in the same year as another person with the same name, record the date of birth in the form [year] [month] [day]. Record the month in the language and script preferred by the agency creating the data.
In AACR2, flourished dates are not used for dates within the twentieth century. There is no such limitation on recording years of activity in RDA.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
22.19A1. If neither a fuller form of name nor dates are available to distinguish between identical headings of which the entry element is a given name, etc., devise a suitable brief term and add it in parentheses.
22.19B1. If neither a fuller form of name nor dates are available to distinguish between identical headings of which the entry element is a surname, add a qualifier (e.g., term of honour, term of address, title of position or office, initials of an academic degree, initials denoting membership in an organization) that appears with the name in works by the person or in reference sources. Add the qualifier after the last element of the name.
In RDA 9.19.1.2, titles or other designations added to names are limited to:
a) a title of royalty (see 9.4.1.4) or nobility (see 9.4.1.5)
b) the term Saint (see 9.6.1.4)
c) title of religious rank (see 9.4.1.6-9.4.1.8)
d) the term Spirit (see 9.6.1.5)
e) a term indicating profession or occupation (see 9.16) or field of activity of the person (see 9.15), in that order of preference, for a person whose name consists of a phrase or appellation not conveying the idea of a person.
9.19.1.6 If none of the elements specified under 9.19.1.3 (date of birth and/or death), 9.19.1.4 (fuller form of name), or 9.19.1.5 (period of activity of the person) is available to distinguish one access point from another, add a term indicating the profession or occupation of the person (see 9.16).
9.19.1.7 If none of the elements specified under 9.19.1.3 (date of birth and/or death), 9.19.1.4 (fuller form of name), 9.19.1.5 (period of activity of the person), or 9.19.1.6 (profession or occupation) are available to distinguish one access point from another, add a term indicating the field of activity of the person (see 9.15).
9.19.1.1 If no suitable addition is available, use the same access point for all persons with the same name, and use an undifferentiated name indicator (see 8.11) to designate the name as one that is undifferentiated.
(Source: Shiff, Adam L. “Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples.”)
Comments:
#1. For the 100 $a, RDA 8.5.6 says to leave a space between letters. In the 245 $c, RDA 1.7.6 says to omit any internal spaces if initials have full stops between them on the resource. (One of the JSC potential tasks after the first release of RDA is to consider standardizing the convention for spacing with initials and acronyms.)
#2. In 100 $d, “b.” and “d.” dates are not covered by appendix E because they are not punctuation issues. During the Test, LC will use a hyphen rather than spelling out the abbreviation.
#3. The full stop used after symbol “cm” is the ISBD full stop preceding the series area; if no series area is present, the full stop is not used because notes are paragraphed in an ISBD display. The 336-338 fields are ignored when determining if that ISBD full stop is needed.
Comment: In RDA, the copyright date is a separate element from the date of publication. The copyright date can be used to supply a probable date of publication but it is not used in lieu of a date of publication; if the cataloger is not sure of the probable date, it can be recorded as “[2001?]”. RDA 1.9.2 has instructions about categories of supplied dates. In MARC records, both dates are given in the 260 subfield $c separated by a comma.
Comment: A cataloger could decide to omit some of the information in the 245 subfield $c; RDA 2.4.1.4 has an optional omission allowing a cataloger to omit information in the statement of responsibility.
Comments:
#1. The relationship of this expression to the original (in this record as an unstructured description in the 500 field) could also be expressed by a structured description in a 500 field (or a 765 field) or by an authorized access point.
500 ## $a Translation of: Alquimista / Paulo Coelho. -- Rio de
Janeiro : Rocco, 1991. -- 247 pages ; 21 cm
700 1# $i Translation of: $a Coelho, Paulo. $t Alquimista.
#2. It is cataloger’s judgment to use a relationship designator from RDA appendix I in the 100 field for Coelho and in the 700 field for Clarke.
100 1# $a Coelho, Paulo, $e author
700 1# $a Clarke, Alan $q (Alan R.), $e translator
#3. The 700 field does not need to be justified by transcribing the second statement of responsibility (not a core element): translated by Alan R. Clarke. A cataloger could decide to transcribe it, especially if a relationship designator is not present in the 700 field.
Comments:
#1. 300 subfield $a could also be “1 volume (unpaged)”
#2. LC will use spelling “color” in 300 subfield $b.
Comment:
#1. A cataloger could decide to omit some of the information in the 245 subfield $c; RDA 2.4.1.4 has an optional omission allowing a cataloger to omit information in the statement of responsibility.
#2. It is cataloger’s judgment to use a relationship designator from RDA appendix I in the 100 and 700 fields.